4 ms·

Why is government activity labeled 'intervention' and private sector activity not labeled as such?

privong 13y ago
Because government activity is generally mandated (both in the sense that they can compel people to change their behavior or that people can't refuse to contribute money towards government endeavours), while private sector activity is generally optional.
- kaonashi 13y ago
  You are by no means forced to participate in any government activity (at least since the draft ended).
  - privong 13y ago
    People in the US are now forced to buy health insurance (or pay a fine/tax).
    - kaonashi 13y ago
      > (or pay a fine/tax) Then you're not forced into one course of action.
      - privong 13y ago
        > Then you're not forced into one course of action. You're being forced into parting with your money. So, yes, you are being forced into a course of action.
        kaonashi 13y ago
        You are punished if you fail to fulfill your obligation, yes; but how you go about doing that is completely open to you. Hence freedom.
  - jdbernard 13y ago
    Sweet! Does that mean I'm OK if I stop paying my taxes?
    - dkuntz2 13y ago
      Ask Henry David Thoreau.
    - kaonashi 13y ago
      Taxes are an obligation, not government activity.
  - adventured 13y ago
    There are lots of examples where that's not true, forced selective service for adult males and social security registration at birth to name two.
- guelo 13y ago
  That's not the meaning of intervening. It means something like meddling. The point is that when businesses do something to the economy it is not called an intervention.
nhaehnle 13y ago
Even worse, whether government activity is labelled 'intervention' does not follow any sound logical pattern in practice. To make it painfully obvious: When was the last time you heard somebody characterize the existence of limited liability companies as 'intervention'? Who out there consistently calls copyright law an 'intervention'? It would be possible to use the term 'intervention' consistently. In actual practice, it is (typically) only used as a rhetorical device to support the speaker's preconceived political position. That causes the term to become loaded.

Because government activity is generally mandated (both in the sense that they can compel people to change their behavior or that people can't refuse to contribute money towards government endeavours), while private sector activity is generally optional.

kaonashi 13y ago
You are by no means forced to participate in any government activity (at least since the draft ended).
- privong 13y ago
  People in the US are now forced to buy health insurance (or pay a fine/tax).
  - kaonashi 13y ago
    > (or pay a fine/tax) Then you're not forced into one course of action.
    - privong 13y ago
      > Then you're not forced into one course of action. You're being forced into parting with your money. So, yes, you are being forced into a course of action.
      - kaonashi 13y ago
        You are punished if you fail to fulfill your obligation, yes; but how you go about doing that is completely open to you. Hence freedom.
- jdbernard 13y ago
  Sweet! Does that mean I'm OK if I stop paying my taxes?
  - dkuntz2 13y ago
    Ask Henry David Thoreau.
  - kaonashi 13y ago
    Taxes are an obligation, not government activity.
- adventured 13y ago
  There are lots of examples where that's not true, forced selective service for adult males and social security registration at birth to name two.
guelo 13y ago
That's not the meaning of intervening. It means something like meddling. The point is that when businesses do something to the economy it is not called an intervention.

nhaehnle 13y ago

Even worse, whether government activity is labelled 'intervention' does not follow any sound logical pattern in practice. To make it painfully obvious: When was the last time you heard somebody characterize the existence of limited liability companies as 'intervention'? Who out there consistently calls copyright law an 'intervention'? It would be possible to use the term 'intervention' consistently. In actual practice, it is (typically) only used as a rhetorical device to support the speaker's preconceived political position. That causes the term to become loaded.